Re: gEDA: gaf - Spice question

[Chris Ellec <cae-at-NOSPAMoco_dot_net>]

Bas Gieltjes wrote:
> 

> The order in which the nets, connected to the pins, get written is pin1,
> pin2, pin3, pin4, pin5 (in function spice:write-net-name-of-component).
> The strings pin1, pin2, etc. are generated in the backend and are used to
> request the net connected to a pin. The spice backend expects that the
> order in which the pins are written is hardcoded in the symbol.
> 
> The invalid wanted-pin(s) is pin5. In the LM324.sym the fifth pin is
> pin11, which is not found. Changing the attribute pin11=11 to pin5=11 is a
> solution, the spice backend ignores the <value> which is given to
> pin#=<value>. (Please check that pin11 is really the fifth pin that should
> be written to the netlist, I have no lm324 spice model to check that)
> 

I tried again with the LM741 so I wouldn't have any problems with slots.

The 741 is an 8 pin package with pin 1 , 5 and 8 unused. The symbol
files only defines pin2, pin3, pin4, pin6 and pin7.

I am getting the same kind of error, which makes sense according to what
you wrote.

....

I changed the pin# to pin1 -> pin5, and now the -g spice works fine.

Ales, how is that going to affect the rest of gaf, if any ? Does that
mean that all the analog parts are not defined right for spice, since
most of them have pinx=x ?


Chris.